Soviet faction

Okay Miss let me put it this way.

You are completely wrong with everything that you have said about the soviet faction which make me think you are either analysing them on paper against other factions and have come to this conclusion or you don't play at a competitive level.

If you ask anyone who plays this game to a decent level they will completely disagree with you and come to the conclusion that you are just playing the faction incorrectly.

Soviets have been consistently strong for a very long time and that is a fact.....unless you are for example between the rank of 1000-2000 and don't really have a grip on the game and understand how it actually works.

Just so I have not got this completely incorrect it would be interesting to know what level you play at in terms of rank?

Is it your only argument? "Competitve players" (I usualy call them nerds) won't agree with you, so I won't agree either, so you are wrong? Do you have something else to say, cos I really don't care about opinion of "competitive players". If they playing more than I do, maybe better than I do, it doesn't mean, that they know that game better then me. It only means, that they are ready to exaust themselvs to get result as "loosy" faction, ignoring that fact, that playing as Axis is veeery relaxing.

If you do not care about other people's posts, nor about the opinion of what you call nerds, go write a blog about the game, but don't post them in a forum.

These so called nerds know the game much better than you do. Their instincts and feelings about the game are closer to being correct than you will ever be. You have been demonstrated by countless other more experienced players and people in this and other threads that your instincts and experience about the game are utterly wrong and that they are completely denied by hard, quantified numbers obtained from the game itself.

Yet, you seem to continue living in your imaginary bubble, shutting down anything that contradicts you.

If you do not care about other people's posts, nor about the opinion of what you call nerds, go write a blog about the game, but don't post them in a forum.

These so called nerds to know the game much better than you do. You have been demonstrated by countless other people in this and other threads that your instincts about the game are wrong and that they are completely denied by hard, quantified numbers obtained from the game itself.

Ok, Im really ready to listen their opinion "from them personally". Maybe they would even agree with me, don't you think? I don't want to read "retelling of someone's opinion from no-names".

I just really tired of that argument: "Oh, top-players don't think, that USSR is trashy trash, so it isn't and we don't have our own opinion, we can only agree with people, who play better than we do...". Or: "There is majortiy opinion, nobody agree with you, so go out of here".

It's not an agruments. That's just signing, that you can't into healthy dialog and only can cover youself with not your own opinion.

They already do not agree with you, and you shut down all possible discussion by calling them nerds and you attempting to make a laughing stock out of them because their display of skills is not up to your demands!

How original

Solves 97% of balance issues here with pinpoint accuracy on identifying real issue and providing the best solution possible.

Soviets have a fair share design issues for the core army(over reliance on doctrines, useless maniline infantry that needs doctrinal support to even compete, sub par tier armor), but they are hardly weak or in need of any kind of serious revamp.

Is it your only argument? "Competitve players" (I usualy call them nerds) won't agree with you, so I won't agree either, so you are wrong? Do you have something else to say, cos I really don't care about opinion of "competitive players". If they playing more than I do, maybe better than I do, it doesn't mean, that they know that game better then me. It only means, that they are ready to exaust themselvs to get result as "loosy" faction, ignoring that fact, that playing as Axis is veeery relaxing.

You don't know the game better than people who are actually good at it and if you seriously think soviets are weak then you don't know how to play the faction which in tern means you don't know what you are talking about.

You are either an arm chair critic or you play the game so badly 'OMG SOVIETS SO BAD' when in fact they are not.

You are the kind of person that likes the sounds of his own voice but does not in fact have a clue what they are talking about.

You don't know the game better than people who are actually good at it and if you seriously think soviets are weak then you don't know how to play the faction which in tern means you don't know what you are talking about.

You are either an arm chair critic or you play the game so badly 'OMG SOVIETS SO BAD' when in fact they are not.

You are the kind of person that likes the sounds of his own voice but does not in fact have a clue what they are talking about.

I know game good enough and I know what I write about. If you think, that "only chosen skilful players has a right to decide - what is good and what is bad", then that game is really dead already.

And be sure, I know how to play as USSR, I can beat people as them, but that's not a point of my entire "USSR is bad faction topic".

When I say "USSR is bad", I don't mean, that you just can beat anyone as them, it means, that it requiers from you way more powers, than it would take from you to beat people as Axis. You just have to play harder then them!

I hate today's situation, when Axis players have easy and relaxing gameplay, while USSR and USF tearing their asses apart for to get that victory.

So, if you think, that it is right "assymetrical balance", when 1 factions needs no skills, while other requiers from you skills of Korean Starcraft Nerd, then OK, game is balanced.

But, I think, balance should mean, that game is equially hard for both sides - axis and allies. Right now it is hard only for allies and only for USSR and USF. All others, including UKF now can just relax and be happy.

...they are hardly week or in need of any kind of serious revamp.

I agree. Still something good for some T1 and T4 units will be good. And poor M-42 too Not that I was expecting something from LoLiks in this direction...

How original

nice quote of a sentence that i never used bro , if you quote someone, dont edit the quote or it lose the sense of a quote

nice quote of a sentence that i never used bro , if you quote someone, dont edit the quote or it lose the sense of a quote

So this

I do and i do great ( rank 44 in 2v2 for example as SOV ), 3 Cons, 2 CE, Maxim, 1 Mortar early game
If you go maxim spam and get bored, well, its your business

no mean L2P?

https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198062472736

This explains everything lol

First of all notice there's a difference between 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3. There's also a huge gap between AT and random or low and higher "skill" (you don't need to be asian with +150 apm to be here).

Balance is made around 1v1, somehow 2v2 and trying to fix exploitable things which might be seen on larger game modes. Balance is also made about thinking on the expected performance of a unit been used properly (positioning, kitting, etc.) which generally implies a certain degree of skill. You need to combine this with changes that doesn't affect as much the top but are QoL for lower levels (for example the USF changes from last year).

With that been said, you are right that there are certain units need a revamp or update to keep up with the new factions n changes, but they are far from been the worst or in bad shape. Rather it's more on a stale state.
_______________________________________

From the core army, more or less:
-T1 as a whole needs an improvement. Penals buff and changed, snipers and M3 tweaked a little bit (tweak doesn't necessarily mean a buff rather than a change on some aspects)
-Maxims need to be support weapons and conscripts main line inf (need SLIGHTLY better scaling/upgrades, which doesn't mean weapons) and not the other way round.
-T34-76 needs to be a bit more reliable with MGs (imo) and the Su85 needs to be less of a medium destroyer to help feel the gap of dealing a bit better with heavier tanks.

Agree or disagree on the changes, i'll say some units need to be more reliable to be use.
________________________________________

Corrections

But, I think, balance should mean, that game is equially hard for both sides - axis and allies. Right now it is hard only for allies and only for USSR and USF. All others, including UKF now can just relax and be happy.

Randumbs 3v3+ is easier for axis than allies due to the lack of coordination and ease of scaling to the late game when they can defend at least 50% of the map. At lower brackets people tend to be less effective on the offensive which hinders the aggressive nature of USF and SU and their early game.

Ok, Im really ready to listen their opinion "from them personally". Maybe they would even agree with me, don't you think? I don't want to read "retelling of someone's opinion from no-names".

From the people who have their playercard available or are known (notice this is just a broad selection) and have commented here:
-Highfive, Mirage, Aero, Iron Emperor, Insanehoshi, Tristan, Zarok, Blalord, myself

I hate today's situation, when Axis players have easy and relaxing gameplay, while USSR and USF tearing their asses apart for to get that victory.

So, if you think, that it is right "assymetrical balance", when 1 factions needs no skills, while other requiers from you skills of Korean Starcraft Nerd, then OK, game is balanced.

But, I think, balance should mean, that game is equially hard for both sides - axis and allies. Right now it is hard only for allies and only for USSR and USF. All others, including UKF now can just relax and be happy.

Seriously? Fckin seriously? Relaxin gameplay vs maxim spam , If im playing with okw, and when i see soviets (and its almost 90% time for me), i want insta alt f4, cause to beat maxim spam, now there u have toget micro... lately i dropped from top 100th to 200th just because i always meet fckin soviets.. relaxing gameplay my ass..

And USF - hard? For me, its always most relaxing faction - Double bar up rifleman of doom and some pak howies, and opponent is fcked up, if u get into late game bring some call in wolwerins. The problem for u might be to relay on shit like shermans. USF power is in uberifleman. (or dobule jakson vs KT)

Double posty - fcked up in quote - please delete upper one.

Logic and reasoning

+1

And celebrating that i am in the list of people of disagreeing with commmisar

https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198062472736

This explains everything lol

Thanks for the laugh.
Till the next soviet fanboy try to step up and claims that the faction need buffs above everything else.
/thread

From the core army, more or less:
-T1 as a whole needs an improvement. Penals buff and changed, snipers and M3 tweaked a little bit (tweak doesn't necessarily mean a buff rather than a change on some aspects)
-Maxims need to be support weapons and conscripts main line inf (need SLIGHTLY better scaling/upgrades, which doesn't mean weapons) and not the other way round.
-T34-76 needs to be a bit more reliable with MGs (imo) and the Su85 needs to be less of a medium destroyer to help feel the gap of dealing a bit better with heavier tanks.

good assessment
as someone who is vocalising their opinions against the SU i would likely be happy with the changes you've listed

although id also like some more thoughtful vet... not that caping territory with my kv-2 or flares on....everything isnt thoughtful....
like changing the moli tech to a nade tech and make the moli a vet 1 for cons

or an arty barrage for the kv-2

but i can dream...

how would you feel if as their "thing" (since the new factions have things) from teching was increased pop cap (maybe as a side tech) and the manpower increase relative to that to help with their "never ending army" image relic so wants?

(i have no clue what ost's thing would be...)

You say balance is targeted towards 1v1.
But this is wrong.


If anything, Soviets are only good in 2v2 to 4v4.
In 1v1 they are not only extremely weak, but also so very hard to play.

Whenever I switch to USF or Ostheer, it's like I'm eating fresh air.

I'm not joking when I tell you that I could get ulcer from playing soviets in their current state.
They needed a nerf for all the things that got nerfed, but somehow Relic only wants to "overnerf" them every single time.

Guards button is overperforming?
Make it mostly usless, and keep price the same for both hmg and perk.

ISU one shots units? Nerf range, damage and keep price the same.

Call-in infantry go from 1cp to 2cp for what reason?

Remove tank call-ins "only" for soviets.
People only build T-34/76? make it so that T-34 is no longer built.

Soviet Industry gives too much fuel/bleeds mp? = make it so that nobody ever uses this commander by removing the whole reason people use it: no more fast tank building + costly fuel drops (instead of only add fuel drops they also remove faster build, why?).

Remove tank call-ins "only" for soviets.

Neg, yankees lost their easy eights, too.

https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198062472736

This explains everything lol

Lol you just rekted him, that dude(or girl) is delusional, cant beleive hé havent played à lot of 2v2 and 1v1 and claims to know shit bout balance. What à fuking joke